On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 02:08:07PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> I totally subscribe to the concerns around publishing binaries (under
> any form), and the expectations in terms of security maintenance that it
> would set on the publisher. At the same time, we need to have images
> available, for convenience and testing. So what is the best way to
> achieve that without setting strong security maintenance expectations
> for the OpenStack community ? We have several options:
> 1/ Have third-parties publish images
> It is the current situation. The issue is that the Kolla team (and
> likely others) would rather automate the process and use OpenStack
> infrastructure for it.
> 2/ Have third-parties publish images, but through OpenStack infra
> This would allow to automate the process, but it would be a bit weird to
> use common infra resources to publish in a private repo.
> 3/ Publish transient (per-commit or daily) images
> A "daily build" (especially if you replace it every day) would set
> relatively-limited expectations in terms of maintenance. It would end up
> picking up security updates in upstream layers, even if not immediately.

I share the concerns around implying support for any of these. But I
also think they could be incredibly useful, and if we don't do it,
there is even more of a chance of multiple "bad" images being published
by others.

I agree having an automated daily image published should give a
reasonable expectation that there is not long term maintenance for

> 4/ Publish images and own them
> Staff release / VMT / stable team in a way that lets us properly own
> those images and publish them officially.
> Personally I think (4) is not realistic. I think we could make (3) work,
> and I prefer it to (2). If all else fails, we should keep (1).
> -- 
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to